Japan's remilitarization risks reopening Asia's wartime wounds

The Asia-Pacific has spent more than eight decades building a post-war order founded on one simple lesson: history should never be repeated. Peace has endured because countries have recognized the devastating consequences of militarism and aggression.

That is why Japan's expanding military footprint has become a source of concern across the region. Tokyo describes its growing defense role as a response to today's security environment. Yet for many in Asia, particularly societies that suffered under Japanese occupation, recent developments evoke unresolved historical trauma and raise questions about whether the foundations of the post-war order are being gradually eroded.

The latest Balikatan military exercise in the Philippines captures this tension. While presented as a multinational security drill, it has also revived memories of wartime atrocities and fueled debate over Japan's military trajectory.

New military coalition cannot erase the memories of war

This year's Balikatan exercise marked a historic milestone. Japan dispatched around 1,400 personnel, its largest-ever contingent, to the annual military drills led by the Philippines and the United States. It was also the first time since the end of World War II that Japan deployed a complete combat force to the Philippines.

The deployment included three vessels, two aircraft and the first overseas launch of Japan's Type 88 surface-to-ship missile system.

One moment during the exercise proved especially symbolic. Japan's Ground Self-Defense Force struck the Philippine Navy’s BRP Quezon as a live-fire target, sending the World War II-era warship beneath the waves.

Strategic partnerships may evolve with changing geopolitical circumstances, but historical memory does not disappear with them.

Across Asia, the legacy of Japan's wartime occupation remains deeply personal. Mass killings, military sexual slavery, forced labor and chemical warfare left lasting scars across the region. In the Philippines alone, the Philippine World War II Memorial Foundation estimates that one in every 17 Filipinos died during the Japanese occupation.

Many survivors continue to seek recognition and accountability.

"There are still victims, in fact, who are alive still and who I understand are still waiting on an apology," said Pichamon Yeophantong, associate professor at Deakin University’s Centre for Future Defense and National Security. "Different countries that have experienced the unfortunate legacy of Japan's involvement in the Second World War."

China has echoed those concerns. Responding to Japan's participation in Balikatan, Zhang Xiaogang, spokesperson of China's Ministry of National Defense, noted in April that the Manila Massacre, the Bataan Death March and the forced recruitment of "comfort women" remain among the most painful memories of World War II. He urged relevant countries "not to forget the lessons learned from the painful history, listen to the voice of the people, stop stoking division and confrontation, and jointly thwart Japan's neo-militarism."

Maritime order should be built through consultation

Historical memory is now intersecting with contemporary legal disputes.

Japan and the Philippines recently announced plans to pursue maritime delimitation talks concerning waters east of China's Taiwan region. According to a legal opinion released by the China Institute for Marine Affairs under the Ministry of Natural Resources, the proposed delimitation overlaps with the exclusive economic zone and continental shelf to which China is entitled under international law.

The report argues that the initiative was launched without consultation with China, despite the three countries being neighboring coastal states in the waters concerned. It concludes that the move is inconsistent with principles of sovereign equality, cooperation and good faith.

Article 74 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) states that "the delimitation of exclusive economic zones between states with opposite or adjacent coasts shall be effected by agreement" in accordance with international law in order to achieve an equitable solution.

Taiwan is an inalienable part of China's territory. Any maritime delimitation involving waters adjacent to Taiwan cannot legitimately proceed without China's participation.

Bypassing consultation on such issues risks undermining both the legal principles governing maritime boundaries and the post-war arrangements that have shaped regional stability for decades.

Military expansion deserves regional vigilance

The maritime issue has unfolded alongside regional concerns over Japan's evolving security policy.

"There are concerns that we’re hearing with greater frequency around Japan's potential perceived remilitarization in that regard," Deakin University's Pichamon Yeophantong said.

Klaus Heinrich Raditio, lecturer in Chinese politics at Driyarkara School of Philosophy, also questioned the regional implications of Japan's expanding defense capabilities.

"I'm also wondering if the increase in Japanese defense spending will escalate the tension in the region," said Raditio, "If any country is willing to increase its defense spending and claim that it will not escalate the tension, how can it work?"

The developments from Japan, including expanded defense spending, overseas military deployments, transfers of offensive military equipment and continued discussions on revising the pacifist Constitution, suggest a gradual shift away from the post-war restraints.

Every country has legitimate security concerns. Yet in East Asia, military choices are inseparable from history. The peace established after World War II was built through enormous sacrifice, and preserving that legacy requires both respect for international law and an honest reckoning with history.